


It's Not The Content, It's The Framing: Vic's Story

by Saathi1013



Category: Longmire (TV)
Genre: Character Analysis, Gen, Media analysis, Meta
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2016-09-22
Updated: 2016-09-22
Packaged: 2018-08-16 17:48:41
Rating: Not Rated
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 1
Words: 1,562
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/8111656
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/Saathi1013/pseuds/Saathi1013
Summary: Wherein Saathi writes an essay critiquing the portrayal of Vic Moretti on Longmire.(NOT A FIC or other fanwork -- sorry subscribers and feeders)





	

**Author's Note:**

> This is my first attempt at archiving some of my meta on this site. Let's see how it goes!

Okay, I’ve been wanting to talk about Vic Moretti, and how she’s _awesome*_ , but also about I don’t think the show has done her real justice in the first four seasons. Posting this before season 5, so if you come to this late and I’m jossed, then welp, I can live with that if you can.

*...and no, this is not just spillover from my intense multilayered Thing for Kara Thrace, though I’d be lying if I said that some of that hadn’t influenced my decision to watch this show in the first place. And I’ll also admit that it did take a rewatch of Longmire to fully appreciate Vic’s arc, but tbh, I think that’s mostly because _the writing obscures it_.

* * *

 

To keep things simple, I’ll break Vic’s narrative down into two major elements: the **content** , and the **framing** , or the way it gets told/revealed.

I have no quibble with the first. I find it super compelling, actually! Vic made some shitty choices back in Philly, but when push came to shove, she did the right thing. She gave her gross, married bf (Gorski) the boot. She turned in a corrupt fellow cop and stuck to her guns despite some intense pushback from peers. And when things got too bad - psychological fuckery from Gorski, the corrupt cop committing suicide - she booked it halfway across the continent with her husband, dyed her hair, and tried to make a fresh go of it.

Her past still haunted her, though. First in person with Gorski, who is just gross as shit on every possible level, and then with Branch, whose actions put her in a position where she has to face the exact same moral conundrum that demolished her life the first time. And despite that, she chooses to do the right thing anyway - which ends in Branch’s suicide, or so she is led to believe at first. (Incidentally, how relieved do you think she was when they figured out that it was a murder? How guilty do you think she felt _about feeling relieved?_ )

And then with Walt at the end of s3/beginning of s4, she’s faced with a similar conundrum: Walt seems to be crossing the same line, using his power as a law enforcement officer to pursue a personal vendetta, and... she’s _not wrong_ , ya’ll. But this time, she makes a different choice, going so far as to tamper with evidence from a crime scene because she’s worried it will implicate him. Now whether you want to read her primary motivation as her feelings for Walt; as the fact that Branch had actually been right and manipulated into an impossible situation in order to prove it, and she doesn’t know if the same is true in this case (which it was); or as the fact that a part of her doesn’t want to see the past repeat itself, bc then the pattern would then end with Walt dead and her life in even more of a shambles than before... well, that’s up to you. But they’re all definitely factors.

So I dig her story. I dig the repetition of themes, and how she always treats these things with the emotional weight they deserve, and how she develops as a character after each one.

* * *

 

The framing of her story, however, does her no favors, though it’s _kind of_ hard to get around. Walt’s always going to be the primary protagonist; his perspective is the default one, the one the writers are going to put in the [spotlight](https://thefanmetareader.org/2014/10/13/the-spotlight-effect-in-media-and-fandom-by-saathi1013/) the most often. Unlike the Longmire books, though, which are told in first person, the show actually cuts away from Walt fairly frequently to show key events though other people’s perspectives. Henry, Walt, Cady, Branch, and yes, even Vic, have had their time in the spotlight, but Walt’s the headliner and always will be. So the final verdict on most events is delivered by him.

For instance, Jacob Nighthorse is rarely _explicitly shown_ to be guilty of or admitting complicity in _all_ the criminal activities that Walt has accused him of in the first four seasons. Some, yes, but I’d argue that it’s a significant minority compared to all the times Walt suspects or even accuses him of wrongdoing. And I’m not sure Nighthorse’s actual crimes have been, on the whole, _worse_ than the ones that viewers cheer for when it’s Walt or Henry doing ‘em (fun bro outing: grave-robbing, _apparently_ ). Yet the narrative consistently frames Nighthorse as untrustworthy and even villainous. In season 4, Nighthorse demands an apology from Walt for accusing him of a crime he didn’t commit, and it almost feels like it’s framed as petty obstructionism regarding Walt’s current case instead of a _totally justified request._

Likewise, I think that the framing of Vic’s story undermines its impact and her characterization. She’s had more time in the spotlight than Nighthorse thus far, yes, but a lot of her story happens - or rather, _happened_ \- offscreen, before the show starts. And while that’s also true for some of Walt’s story (Martha’s illness and death, the initial investigation of her murder), we at least get flashbacks to some of that. The pre-canon flashback(s?) we get for Vic involved her hookups with Gorski, and that relationship isn’t even the most interesting part about her past. Moreover, her liaisons with Gorski have the _least_ relevance to the important themes of her story compared to all the other events that happened in Philadelphia.

Unless... _unless_ the writers consider Vic’s romantic history and status to be the most important things about her _within the overall narrative of Walt’s life_.

What I mean by this is: if we acknowledge that (a) Walt is the primary protagonist, and (b) Walt/Vic is a real possibility, then therefore (c) Vic’s role (or, more forgivingly, _one of_ her major roles) _in the primary protagonist’s narrative_ is as a potential/eventual love interest. In her own narrative, she’s the protagonist, but within the framework of the show, she’s a supporting character in _Walt’s_ story.

And that’s fine. I am absolutely _not_ here for the routine dismissal of female characters as ‘mere’ love interests. I’ve seen that kind of thing too often, and know how shitty and gross it can be, especially when it comes to people who prefer to ship an m/m pairing involving the male character in the canonical m/f ship... aaand I have made no secret about shipping Henry/Walt. So I refuse to fall into that sexist trap. Vic deserves better.

But Vic deserves better from the show, too. Because most of her story is not just offscreen, but what we _do_ see is usually telling us as much (if not more) about her relationship - usually romantic - with a particular man than it tells us about _her_. Her decision to turn Branch in via a typed letter gets confused with the possibility of her resigning, which is weighted with the implication that resignation means not just leaving her job, but leaving _Walt_. When she receives her divorce papers, it’s from Walt, and this is immediately followed by one of the rare times Walt shows emotional openness. Then, her decision to sign the papers occurs _after_ he says he doesn’t want her to leave, tying the two together by implication if not in causal fact. Even her marriage problems are less about her life with her husband and more about how her husband compares and relates to _Walt_. What we learn of her past is framed in relation to Gorski, in relation to Branch, in relation to Walt. And so on.

Admittedly, this is somewhat inevitable when we have such a dearth of female characters (there are, what, 3 female characters who appear in all 4 seasons? Vic, Cady, & Ruby? and a scant half-dozen more who both have names and appear in multiple episodes, maybe?), but there are ways to tell stories where men _influence_ a woman’s story without them _defining_ it. For comparison: Branch’s story is influenced by Walt, sure, and also by Barlow and Cady and Nighthorse and Sam Poteet and Vic and so on, but Branch is the one who _defines_ it. Henry’s narrative was most often defined by his relationship with Walt at first, but eventually, it broke free from that framing. Now Henry’s story stands on its own while, yes, being influenced by a range of characters.

Really, what I’d like is to see is for Vic’s story to get that same opportunity, and for it not to be defined by (nor its narrative _purpose_ to further) her relationship with Walt. Deconstructing the Walt/Vic relationship arc is its own post, and my thoughts on it are highly subjective, but the short version is: I think these two characters still have some growth to do before I (personally) can really root for them being together. Giving Vic’s story more breathing room would go a long way towards that. Hell, even if you _do_ ship them, I don’t think it’s unfair to say that _any_ relationship narrative can only benefit from each character being shown as individuals whose lives compliment each other rather than revolve entirely around each other.

In conclusion: Vic is awesome and her story is awesome and both deserve better writing in season 5 (and beyond). Now we got two days till we see if we'll get it. :D

 

 

**Author's Note:**

> You could also make a similar argument for how Cady is portrayed on the show, and in fact I could step back and use this as a jumping-off point for analyzing how female characters are often portrayed in fiction overall, but like. This was already quite long enough, ha.


End file.
